quote: But with a new Conservative government at the helm, there is expectation among the Jewish community that Canada will change its style of voting on UN resolutions critical of Israel. Shimon Fogel, CEO of the Canada-Israel Committee, told the Jerusalem Post on Jan. 25 that "there is expectation that a Conservative government will take a somewhat more aggressive posture in encouraging the kind of reforms that would allow the UN to fulfill the objectives it was initially designed to address," including ending "the annual cycle of Israel-bashing at the UN."

It is important to recognize that this drift was actually begun by the Liberals, and their policy seems very much to conform to the position paper originally penned by people like Joe Volpe.

It should also be mentioned that there is nothing substantive which has been said by Jack Layton, which does not conform to a pro-Israeli stand, and the only things that he has said, have been in support of Israel's "security" operations in the West Bank. Jack Layton's cautious denunciation of targetted assassination as a method of dealing with Palestinian "war crimes," shows a lack of proncipled analyisis.

Not of course that suicide bombing is not a war crime, because it is, but by any measure of law are targetted killings that result in mass collateral human casualties. Jack seemed unable to point this out in interview, though wuite happy to condemn sucicide bombing clearly.

[ 01 February 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336

posted 01 February 2006 07:31 PM

quote:Originally posted by Cueball:It is important to recognize that this drift was actually begun by the Liberals . . .

I thought it was started by Joe Clark when he mover the Canadian Embassy fro Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

posted 01 February 2006 08:53 PM
True enough. However it seems to me that all Canadian mainstream parties seem to share the drift, aside from whatever other politcal differences they seem to have. Interestingly, this is odd given that mainstream Canadian views are generally neutral, and at worst blame both Palestinians and Israelis equally for the troubles.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 01 February 2006 08:55 PM
Not to do a spelling flame, but since it's the title of the thread, could you please capitalize the word "Israel"? Just to avoid any misunderstandings? That would be great.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged

siren
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7470

posted 01 February 2006 08:59 PM
From my perspective, Layton (perhaps the blame should more properly go to Blaikie) has been very weak on criticizing foreign relations. "Drifting" toward the pro-intervention stance, perhaps.

I would have expected the NDP to stand strongly against the coup we participated in with France and the US in Haiti. Tricky as we saw how quickly public opinion was mobilized to swing an anti-Harper ad put out by the Libs as an anti-military ad.

I think the NDP can and should differentiate themselves from the liberals on this issue. It is an important international distinction for Canada to maintain. Pushing the Byers report AND criticizing offensive use of the CF might be a winner.

Anyone in the new NDP cabinet with a burning interest in foreign relations?

From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged

The Evil Twin
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11561

posted 01 February 2006 09:00 PM

quote:It is important to recognize that this drift was actually begun by the Liberals . . .

Yes, IN 1948 by the then Liberal government. If the US has been the "A" team of pro-Israeli cheerleaders, then the Western Europeans and Canadians have been the "B" team. Unlike the "A" team (which gives 100% support to Israel), we occasionally "criticize" (very mildly) Israeli policies, but OTOH condemn 90% of the Arab/Muslim position. This is true more or less of every Canadian government from 1948 - 2006.

quote:"there is expectation that a Conservative government will take a somewhat more aggressive posture in encouraging the kind of reforms that would allow the UN to fulfill the objectives it was initially designed to address,"

So the Cons want the Blue Hats to move in, enforce Resolution 242, and make Israel withdraw from the Occupied territories?

quote:Right-wing commentators routinely insist that Canada is a nation in decline, that we no longer command respect on the international stage. Beefing up our military spending is their usual solution. In fact, what makes nations respected internationally is their contribution to international justice and the rule of law, not the size of their arsenals.

From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged

ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 03 February 2006 09:46 PM
It's amazing as Arab-Canadians have no voice in Canadian politics, except to feel that the Conservatives are most against them. Even the NDP has forsaken them by moving towards a pro-Israel tilt and keeping mum on foreign policy issues especially over the past election, when the differences between the parties were monumental.

Only Sven Robinson made some noise about Palestine, but was immediately rebuked by McDonough. It seems everyone is mortally afraid of sounding even sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, which is incredibly shameful.

posted 03 February 2006 10:04 PM
The Canadian Arab Federation sent out e-mails outlining the various party stances on issues of concern to the community, but didn't endorse anyone.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged

Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 04 February 2006 03:34 AM

quote:Originally posted by Andy (Andrew):Harper is going to change the reputation of Canada on this issue.

That is inevitable: the political landscape over there has changed, so we will have to change accordingly. The choices are to align with the expansionist but willing to talk state of Israel, and Hamas.

Unless Hamas is able to re-invent itself as a legitimate nationalist movement like the IRA/Sinn Féin in Ireland, I see no other option than to more closely ally with the state of Israel.

quote:Originally posted by Gir Draxon:Unless Hamas is able to re-invent itself as a legitimate nationalist movement like the IRA/Sinn Féin in Ireland, I see no other option than to more closely ally with the state of Israel.

Canada has been a close ally with the state of Israel under the Martin regime, and others. Our daringness (if we have it) will be to withhold judgement and see what the Hamas regime will do -- as many nations did with Fatah. Fatah were considered violent terrorist, intent on the destruction of Israel, but progressive countries sucked it up and worked with them.

It is ridiculous to dismiss Hamas out of hand. We have no hand. This was a democratic election and the Palestinian people have spoken.

It will be interesting to see who our new Foreign Affairs individual is. It cannot be, as I once worried, Stockwell Day. Harper (or more appropriately, the people behind him, whomever they may be) is building a far more enduring cabinet than that.

From: Of course we could have world peace! But where would be the profit in that? | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged

skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 04 February 2006 05:06 AM
One of the reasons all our parties are so weak on foreign policy is that the citizenry in general are minimally informed and minimally interested (perhaps because many at least realize they are not well informed), and further, have some distance to go in abandoning prejudices and cultural arrogance from the past, partly because the msm still often reinforce those prejudices and that cultural arrogance.

So even the NDP fear leading too far in advance of the old alliances and prejudices. This is a historical pattern, of course, but in this case I think it is a desperately dangerous one.

All we can do is continue to testify - to the humanity of those who are the victims of international power games and to the working of the power games themselves, in which we are implicated and complicit. It is the Canadian people who need to hear us - the politicians won't move until the people do.

Canada has been a close ally with the state of Israel under the Martin regime, and others. Our daringness (if we have it) will be to withhold judgement and see what the Hamas regime will do -- as many nations did with Fatah. Fatah were considered violent terrorist, intent on the destruction of Israel, but progressive countries sucked it up and worked with them.

It is ridiculous to dismiss Hamas out of hand. We have no hand. This was a democratic election and the Palestinian people have spoken.

If the Palestine has spoken, and the words are "Destruction to Israel", we have no business supporting them. That has been the message of Hamas in the past, but not neccesarily now or in the future. The ball is in their court. If they, like Fatah, will at least come to the negotiation table, there is hope for peace.
From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged

Michael Watkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11256

posted 04 February 2006 08:42 AM
Hmnn, seems to me we have a parallel here:

Over there==========

Party: Hamas, doesn't believe in the legitimacy of Israel

Incumbent: Seen as corrupt, in power too long

Voters: Turf out incumbent, even though it is very clear that not all of the voters that voted for Hamas agree with the party's stand on Israel.

Over Here=========

Party: Conservative Party of Canada, doesn't believe in same sex marriage

Incumbent: Seen as corrupt, in power too long

Voters: Turf out incumbent, even though it is very clear that not all of the voters that voted for CPC agree with the party's stand on same sex marriage.

Over there, like over here, voters turf out incumbent governments rather than *vote in* new governments. Its the only way to interpret the size of the Hamas vote.

Once in power, a goverment often has to moderate positions it holds in order to deliver what the overwhemling majority of the population always want: peace, order and good government.

Hamas might yet surprise to the positive. The world ought to permit them the opportunity to try.

posted 04 February 2006 08:45 AM
Hamas has been organizing anti-Danish protests. They are against free expresion and advocate violence. I'm quite pleased to have our governmnet support democratic states like Israel where gays, women and cartoonists are free to come out of the closet and have the power of law to protect them from bigotry.

So-called progressives are often anything but 'progressive' but rather so blind in their anti-Ameicanism that they embrace even more oppressive thugs as some false sense of improvement.

posted 04 February 2006 08:51 AM
asterlake, you don't have to agree with any "anti-Danish" protest to see that Hamas, like many other peoples in Muslim countries, would be feeling that they are fighting bigotry themselves right now. And they would be right, of course.

Well, you could see that if you'd look to that beam in your own eye before you complain about the mote in someone else's.

posted 04 February 2006 08:58 AM
asterlake - it seems that you are responding emotionally here, am I wrong?

Being supportive of the democratic process unfortunately means that you are going to see parties take power that you do not like. Neither Fatah nor Hamas are shining examples of "progressive" policy machines, are they?

But if the area is to ever progress on any front, it must first break out of the cycle of violence.

No modern progressive society happened overnight.

My wish is that the Palestinian people be free to exercise their vote to the fullest, which means of course they must suffer the result. Hamas will deliver or it won't. It will renounce violence, or curb it, or it won't. It will change its stance on Israel or it won't. But it must act and the people must see what this new government does before it can be rightfully judged.

It won't be the first time that an armed and violent rebellion turns into a government. Not all such transformations culminate in a working society that the world could embrace, but once in a while it happens.

I know nothing of the power struggles within Hamas, who is agitating for change, positive change, if any - but if experience with the political process is any guide, somewhere within Hamas there must be people wanting to make positive steps. No large group of people is completely homogenous in thought.

Allowing Hamas to form government and try to deliver on peace, order and good government might be the best thing for Israel in the end.

posted 04 February 2006 09:14 AM
Cheering the victory of Hamas is like cheering on Hitler when he came to power. The historical circumstances might be unjust but that doesn't translating into for support the actions of a bunch of subsequent hate-mongerers hell bent on bigotry and violence.
From: Exshaw | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged

quote:Originally posted by asterlake:Cheering the victory of Hamas is like cheering on Hitler when he came to power. The historical circumstances might be unjust but that doesn't translating into for support the actions of a bunch of subsequent hate-mongerers hell bent on bigotry and violence.

Maybe they're bent merely on liberation? By the way, your own posts smack of bigotry, so who are you to talk?

posted 04 February 2006 10:03 AM
Apparently the imperialists in the West and their satellites in the state of Israel are feeling powerless and the only means left to them is to propagate prejudice and hatred, pumping those who listen to them with feeling of superiority that they have to defend, maintain and promote.

Feeling powerless because while they have the means to occupy, colonize, exploit and provoke, they could not find any means to control the reaction of their targets.

Terrorists because they did not react to occupations in a manner that WE find acceptable.We cannot control a suicide bomber who chooses or not to target civilians. We scream "Not fair! You are supposed to be facing us with your gun and see who wins!"

Violent because they threatened to kidnap, kill and maim following our deliberate provocation. "Not Fair, You are supposed only to draw your own cartoon depicting Jesus/Mooses in any way you want. We call it freedom of expression."

Of course not that I condone any kind of terrorism or violence, but Have we tried simply mutual understanding, non interference, no occupation of others' lands, no attempts at exporting our "better" and "superior" ways ?

quote:Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:OK - Hamas are Nazis! We can stop now.

Maybe they're bent merely on liberation? By the way, your own posts smack of bigotry, so who are you to talk?

There is nothing 'liberating' about Hamas. You confuse rampant nationalism and religious bigotry with liberation. Liberation is freeing individuals to speak freely, worship freely, gay rights,women's rights and so on.

Libertion isn't inciting folks to burn down Danish and Norwegian symbols to impose censorship in western newspapers. The 'bigots' are those so who accept hateful action as some type of justification to combat injustice.

quote:Originally posted by FabFabian:Oh, so Hamas is responsible for the outrage over the Danish cartoon now? Get your facts straight and cut the hysteria.

Responsible for encouraging hatred. Yes. Hamas has organize anti-Danish protests. Read the news.This so-called 'liberating' movemnet is paranoid over a cartoon? So much for 'progressive'. support of freedom that many who call themselves such sell out their principles to a hate-mongering group that advocates violence... and the rule of law shaped by a Islamic religion that advocates hatred against homosexuals and second class status for women.

quote:Originally posted by asterlake: Cheering the victory of Hamas is like cheering on Hitler when he came to power. The historical circumstances might be unjust but that doesn't translating into for support the actions of a bunch of subsequent hate-mongerers hell bent on bigotry and violence.

This has nothing to do with cheering. It has to do with the fact that the Palestinian people, through verifiably fair and democratic means, have chosen Hamas as their representatives, and that is the reality all of us have to work with, whether we like it or not.

This has nothing to do with cheering. It has to do with the fact that the Palestinian people, through verifiably fair and democratic means, have chosen Hamas as their representatives, and that is the reality all of us have to work with, whether we like it or not.

Or what? This is 2006. 58 years since the Palestinians were kicked off their land. 3 generations. Israel and 6 million Israelis isn't going away. The Jewish lobby in the USA and other Western nations aren't going away. Israelis have a modern society with free speech,a modern airforce, clean water,nuclear weapons, women's rights, a trained army, first rate schools, missiles, etc. They exist and aren't going to give up a square foot of Israel.

What do the Palestinians have? A few inept troops the Israelis could wipe out in a nano second. Subpar living conditions. So-so education.Frustration. Injustice and so on.

It's not the Israelis getting the short end of the stick. They are not the ones who suffer from the status quo but embrace it. The hardline Israelis are the biggest beneficiaries of the election of Hamas. Now they can point the finger at Hamas's hate-filled pronouncements and garner even more support from the USA. They don't have to concede anything to the Palestinians to get their billions from the USA and more billions in loans to buy the latest in american weapon's technology.

It would be a bad comedy plot if it wasn't about real people and sadness. I spent 11 months in 1983 in the Middle East: 8 months in Alexandria, Egypt and 3 months on the Syria-Israeli border. That was 23 years ago. A whole generation of Palestinians have grown up since. Just change the dates on the newspapers since I was posted there without changing some of the headlines and nothing has improved for the Palestinians. In another 23 more years, nothing is going to change either as long as the Palestinians think that Israel is suddenly going to undergo some enlightened revelation and say 'gee, sorry and would you like to help us dissolve Israel and create a greater Palestinian state'.

quote:Originally posted by asterlake:Cheering the victory of Hamas is like cheering on Hitler when he came to power.

As I pointed out earlier, the majority of people did not vote for Hamas because they were endoring, tacitly or otherwise, Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel.

Don't agree? Well you should, as in these pages you've provided yourself the argument to defeat your position.

You said that its a self-evident truth that Israel has been around for decades and is not going away.

For that reason, one can't argue that Palestinians as a whole voted Hamas in because they want to destroy Israel. They will understand the self-evident truth; what the majority of people want - on both sides of the wall - is to find some way forward to live together.

If Hamas doesn't make progress on that file, as well as make progress on moving the economy forward and all the other issues governments are charged with managing, then the people will vote, or throw, them out.

Fatah wasn't making progress so the people elected a new government. Perhaps its hard for us to understand how they could elect an apparently more radical government, but when there wasn't another option on the ballot and the people want to punish the incumbent, sometimes strange things happen.

Just ask the recently elected Conservatives in Quebec how surprised they are with their results...

posted 04 February 2006 02:33 PM
I agree tht Palestinians are like all societies and vote for particular party for divergent reasons. There is a myth, however, that both sides want peace and give it the same priority. The majority of Israelis would like peace the way that you and I would like the Quebec issue settled in Canada...but not at any cost (such as the breakup of the country). It's not a looming imperative for the Israelis but more like a toothache that acts up now and then but usually goes away. In the meantime they live a western standard of living and life is essentially good. For the Palestinians, the issue is at the core of their existence and impacts generations living in less that ideal conditions and many leaving for other Arab countries.

The Israelis don't need a solution. They'd 'like' a solution but only if its on their terms. The Palestinians, in contrast, need a solution if they want a better life for their children.

I suppose if they think electing a party that advocates the destruction of the state of Israel will better the future prospects of their children, then that was their democatic choice. Even if they voted for Hamas to clean up corruption, that's also their choice. They made that choice quite aware of what the reaction would be of Israel and the United States. I don't know how it helps mom, dad and their children obtain a better life but they live in that part of the world and understand it best.

I sympathize with their plight but just don't know how their present course does anything to break the cycle of 3 generations of frustration. Hamas reminds me a lot of Arafat and the PLO of the early 1970's. Over 30 years later, Israeli kids are tapping away on their computers and taking swimming lesons while Palestinian children are out on the streets throwing rocks.

posted 04 February 2006 03:26 PM
There's winners and loosers but one would think that after 58 years of losing you'd want to change strategy and do something else.

Foreign Affairs? That's a good question. Foreign affairs didn't get much attention in the election. Seems Harper has a lot of economic and social oriented MPs but not many with international experience. At one time Foreign Affairs was up their with Finance Minister as 'the' status portfolio.

quote:Originally posted by asterlake:Hamas has been organizing anti-Danish protests. They are against free expresion and advocate violence. I'm quite pleased to have our governmnet support democratic states like Israel where gays, women and cartoonists are free to come out of the closet and have the power of law to protect them from bigotry.

So-called progressives are often anything but 'progressive' but rather so blind in their anti-Ameicanism that they embrace even more oppressive thugs as some false sense of improvement.

Bollocks. Utter shit in fact. When are Muslims allowed to protest antyhing, accroding to you two Muslims standing one corner is incite to riot. If you had bothered to look at anything but the boob tube you might have noticed that the Hamas demonstrations against Dutch comics were entriely peaceful, and not at all like those by the british radical muslim sect that appears regularly on your TV screen with "Death to whomever signs." The media plays them and you like fools.

It is abslutely legitimate for Muslim people to organize boycotts, stikes and protests, and that is freedom of speech.

In fact the Hamas demosntration was completely peaceful, and it was Hamas that negotiated the freeing of kidnapped Germans, etcetera. But you just apply sweeping 11:00 o'clock news sterotypes to all Muslim's who choose to use Islam as a basis of organization, with a sweeping and I dare say prejudiced brush.

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 February 2006 03:44 PM
What in gods name is your problem with this:

quote: In Gaza City in the Palestinian territories after Friday prayers, an estimated 200,000 Hamas supporters marched through the streets to the legislative council, creating a sea of green over the city.

They held signs declaring "Anyone except the Prophet".

The demonstration, the largest the Strip has seen in years, was violence-free, and attended by men, women and children who came from all over the Gaza Strip carrying copies of the holy Quran.

posted 04 February 2006 06:49 PM
I know its a problem for some stalinst types when the people say and do things that they don't like. Perhaps we should send them all to the Gulag?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 February 2006 06:50 PM
Oh wait! They are already in a gulag. And interseting that like so many of the people who found themselves in Stalin's gulag they turned to religion. Neat!
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 04 February 2006 06:53 PM
Do you have a problem with people making public demonstrations in support of things you don't like, or not? Or is ridiculing thaty part of freedom of speech you are so high and mightry about. It seems what you mean by freedom of speech is the freedom of you to say what it is you like, while ridiculing other people religious beliefs and that progressive means shitting on people who say things you don't agree with, even if they don't carry nasty signs, and kick over garbage cans.

[ 04 February 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 05 February 2006 01:38 AM

quote:Originally posted by asterlake: What do the Palestinians have? A few inept troops the Israelis could wipe out in a nano second. Subpar living conditions. So-so education.Frustration. Injustice and so on.

And that frustration and injustice is why Palestinians supported Hamas. Hamas, for all their violent activities, has done much for social welfare of Palestinian people in terms of providing schools, health care, and other supports for the Palestinian people. The Palestinians appreciate that, and that's why Hamas has support. The election was a way for them to vent their frustrations, they have, and all the rest of the world can do is to work with the results.

posted 05 February 2006 02:00 AM
In that way, the election of Hamas is not at all like the Conservatives who want to severely restrict all those things!
From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged

Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 February 2006 03:08 AM
They also being the crazed repressive Islamo-facists that they are elected 6 women.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged

Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 05 February 2006 03:13 AM

quote: Janette Khuri, a 62-year-old Christian, became the first woman mayor of a major West Bank municipality when she was elected by a majority of her 15 fellow councillors.